But all that aside a very real possibility, one that far to many law enforcement “professionals” refuse to consider, is to just let it go. The only justification for a dog leash law is to prevent them from harassing or attacking people or destroying property. If the dogs weren’t doing those things, then there is no damn reason to arrest anyone. Just politely remind him of the new park policy and go about your day without electrocuting someone. Is that really such a complicated idea? That you don’t enforce these petty misdemeanor infractions with violence unless some actual harm is caused by violating them?

There you have it. An anti-libertarian’s solution to disagreements on the proper role of government – misrepresent your opponent’s position.

I think you need to go back and reread the comments. Despite many claims to the contrary, no one is saying that the use of the taser was justified. Dogs off of leashes are a side note. Annoying as they are, it does not mean the ranger was right, and no one has said so. (note, I went back through and reread, no one other than Chuchandra, who is either being silly, or stupid…)

SO let’s agree, using a taser on someone for an offense which you would not be arrested for is unjustifiable and wrong.

So, walking along, you litter in a park. An officer sees you, and is going to write you a ticket. You turn and walk away before they can give it to you.

What should the officer do? Should you just be able to get out of a ticket by running away? That seems absurd. So what’s the alternative?

I got that. However I think it isn’t in most (any) LEO’s make-up to shrug off being disregarded by an individual they have contacted, regardless of the infraction, crime or order (lawful or otherwise). Once authority has been exericesed there simply is no room for anything less than complete compliance. A scary situation in a world where park rangers carry tasers.

I do pick up my own dog’s mess, even while walking on the horse trail, where all manner of horses, coyote, rabbits, birds, squirrels, cats, other dogs (and yes, mountain bikers!) do not.

- dog park recently changes rules.
- guy doesn’t know rules.
- guy doesn’t bring his wallet to just walk his dogs.
- ranger informs him of violation.
- demands ID and tries to detain him.
- ranger refuses to tell guy if he is being detained or not.
- guy walks off. (can’t blame him the whole thing is ridiculous)
- ranger tazes him.
- other park goers are horrified.
- guy takes an ambulance ride.
- ranger is covered for and everyone else is identified.

Some people think this is appropriate because they personally dislike dogs off leashes. Some people think this is appropriate because walking away from an officer, even when they refuse to fully inform you of the situation or even if, or why, you are being detained is a dangerous activity. The fact that it’s only dangerous because cops can easily get away with psychotic violence consequence free, is completely lost on the badge-worshipers. The right of cops to beat you takes supremacy over any reasonable expectation of what activities justify a violent response.

Fuck this stupid country, the petty tyrants in the citizenry deserve their police state. It’s a pity everyone else has to suffer through their bullshit, though.

There you have it, the libertarian’s solution to minor infractions that you don’t agree with — just walk away when they tell you to stop.

I was referring to the law enforcement officer.

According to Radley, “It is okay, even appropriate sometimes, to just walk away.”

There you have it, the libertarian’s solution to minor infractions that you don’t agree with — just walk away when they tell you to stop.

I am uncomfortable with just saying they should be let go if they walk away, it doesn’t seem like refusal to cooperate with reasonable requests from an LEO means a freebie. (note: I’m not saying the ranger in this case was being reasonable).

Go back and read again. No one is worked up over a leash law. People are worked up over the Tasing of a man who violated it.

Bro.

When a cop acts outside the scope of law, to include disproportionate force, such behavior is by definition criminal. The catch-all categories used to attempt to justify the criminal cop behavior after the fact (i.e. resisting arrest, failure to obey) does not negate criminal actions on the part of the cop regardless of what the cop shops want others to believe.

You are, of course, absolutely correct about the cop worship being commonplace when there are in fact vicious criminals who wear badges and in some cases act in a manner in which they should indeed be shot dead before their acts of criminal violence can be completed (legal example: Bad Elk vs United States).

In this case, your logic is again spot on regarding Tazers being “less-lethal”, meaning “occasionally lethal”, weapons and that the use of such an “occasionally lethal” weapon on a man for no other reason than possibly being in violation of a recently changed rule with no visible criminal intent nor actual victim is, indeed a very big problem in need of immediate correction.

It will take a while to get through some of the thick-skulled readers out there, but it is possible as evidenced by myself.